The Delhi government has the right to appoint public prosecutors and the Lieutenant Governor should act on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers, the Supreme Court said Thursday.
Giving a split verdict on the contentious issue of who should control administrative services in a case pertaining to long-running conflict between the Narendra Modi government at the Centre and the AAP government in the national capital, the top court said that the LG should act on the advice of ministers of the Delhi government.
A bench of Justices A K Sikri and Ashok Bhushan relied upon the Delhi High Court's verdict which held that in matters such as power to appoint a public prosecutor, the Delhi government has legislative competence and that the LG shall act on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers.
The bench said: "The high court has rightly held that in respect of these entries, the Government of NCT of Delhi has legislative competence under Article 239AA of the Constitution and that the LG under Article 239AA(4) of the Constitution shall act on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers...
"We, therefore, hold that Lieutenant Governor, while appointing the Special Public Prosecutor, is to act on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers."
Special Public Prosecutor is appointed as per the provisions of Section 24(8) of Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) which confers this power on both the centre and the state government.
The Delhi government had argued in court that the power to appoint SPP should rest with it once the "Government of NCT of Delhi is found to be the state government under the CrPC".
However, the Centre contended that under the CrPC "both the central and state government" will be represented by the Centre "alone".
The bench considered the Centre's contention as an "absurd legal position" and said that under the 69th amendment, various powers of the state, including appointment of SPPs, have been exercised by the elected government of Delhi.
"We have made it clear that it would depend upon language used in defining State Government in a particular enactment," the bench said.
The two judges were hearing pleas on six matters pertaining to a long-running conflict between the Narendra Modi government at the Centre and the AAP government in the national capital.
They gave a unanimous order on five issues. They gave a split verdict on the contentious issue of who should control administrative services but appeared to agree that the Centre has the final word.
Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content
